cinema, current events, Film Review

DVD Pick: V for Vendetta

As I browsed through the ‘Net, I found my old blog (parts of it) archived. I’m re-blogging it here. In this era of Big Business-Big Government alliance, it is always a good idea to watch V for Vendetta to remind ourselves the importance of individual and collective liberties. I have to add that Natalie Portman’s portrayal was great. And so was Hugo Weaving’s vocal performance. Freedom Forever!

v maskWhile the film is about ten years old, the character V’s Guy Fawkes mask is now a world-wide symbol of protest. It is also a symbol of the international network of computer-savvy activists.

I’m glad I found these old blogposts. This post plus the documentary critique SEEING TREASON: Justifying a State of Emergency in a documentary plus Good Night and Good Luck: Reminder to Defend Freedom of the Press remind us the precarious state of Freedom during the Macapagal-Arroyo regime.

ScreenHunter_127 Jul. 09 09.52

 

 

TUESDAY, MARCH 21, 2006

V for Vendetta:

The Movie to watch in Big Sister’s Philippines

The Wachowski brothers did it again! The Matrix (the original) was such a great philosophical metaphor of a film. This time, it is a straightforward attack on the idiots who support and follow Georgie Porgie and his War on Terror.

Well, it is still a metaphor but anyone can immediately see the parallel between the High Chancellor (played by the very good actor John Hurt) and George W. Bush, and the events in the film are close to reality.

The Americans have already given up some of their freedoms in support of Bush’s War on Terror. It is not inconceivable that the US will go the way of England as depicted in the film.

In fact, in the Philippines, some of the things shown in the film are already happening. As the soldiers involved in the Oakwood mutiny have asserted, the bombing in Davao was done by the soldiers themselves with no less than the Armed Forces Chief of Staff or Defense Secretary (Angelo Reyes) being involved.

And of course, the modus operandi of arresting people then labeling them as terrorists and later killing them extra-judicially is too plain to see by critical thinking people.

In the Inquirer Editorial of today, Editorial : When evil is good, the writer compares Orwell’s 1984 with Philippines of today. The editorial concludes:

In our present stage of political instability and turmoil, when there is undeclared martial law and a creeping movement toward authoritarianism, it would be well for the people to keep the lessons of “1984” in mind and strongly resist the totalitarian actions and rules of the administration. If we remain too long in a state of apathy and inaction, we may wake up too late, when we have already lost our freedom.

The Orwellian film V for Vendetta is more proximate and more accessible to today’s audience than Orwell’s novel.

Little Miss Gloria, her little “Mike to the Defense” Defensor and her Justice Secretary would do well to watch this film.

In the Philippines, such a movie could not be made. The producers / director would be charged with sedition by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her Jusdtice Secretary and be attacked in the media by her defender, Secretary Defensor.

This film is recommended to all freedom-loving people, especially the Muslims, who now carry the stigma of terrorism the world over due to Bush propaganda.

I must say, hats off to the Wachowskis for their courage in making a film that goes against the Terror-mongers like Bush and Blair.

documentary, Film Review, History, Media Studies

SEEING TREASON: Justifying a State of Emergency in a documentary

In February 2006, then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, in her pursuit of a “Strong Republic”, proclaimed a State of Emergency through Presidential Proclamation 1017 to give her government Martial Law powers. Malacanang produced a documentary titled Paglaban sa Kataksilan: 1017 (1017: To Fight Treason). The Philippine Journalism Reports’ (PJR’s) editor asked me to write a review of the government’s documentary.

I blogged this article before but for some reasons, my blog vanished from the cyberspace. Fortunately, the article is still in cyberspace — at the site of the Center for Media and Responsibility, the publisher of PJR.

This piece is important for me because it is historically significant. It was done at a time when the government was serious in its attempts to quell any democratic opposition to its policies. It is a good piece to show Media Studies students what a documentary is and is not. It is also a way of reminding people that the seemingly meek and sick ex-president languishing in a government hospital as a prisoner was actually an iron-willed President (“Strong-person”) of her “Strong Republic” who practically declared Martial Law.

PP1017 REVIEW PJRJournalism Review

REVIEW:  Palace Documentary justifies PP1017
POSTED BY || 30 APRIL 2006

REVIEW: Palace Documentary justifies PP 1017
SEEING TREASON

By Datu Jamal Ashley Abbas

The movie Good Night and Good Luck (2005) showcased what many consider as television journalism’s finest moments when American broadcast journalist Edward Murrow and his team took head-on the Terror known as McCarthyism or the Red Scare that gripped America in the early 1950s. On March 9, 1954, Murrow aired in his TV program See It Now, a documentary showing clips of Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s speeches. Murrow and his team used McCarthy’s own words against the senator.

The timing of the movie is very opportune for Filipinos in the grip of the 1017 aftermath. While Americans have sur-rendered some of their freedoms in the name of President Bush’s war on terror through the Patriot Act, the proclamation of a State of Emergency (PP 1017) in the Philippines has shown everyone that the freedoms that Filipinos regained in EDSA 1986 could easily be lost again.

To justify Proclamation 1017, Malacañang produced a video documentary titled, Paglaban sa Kataksilan: 1017.  The producers and crew of this documentary did not use Murrow’s techniques. Instead, they followed the tactics of Senator McCarthy.

McCarthy fanned the anti-communist hysteria and led the witch-hunt that destroyed the lives of many freedom-loving Americans. Whoever got the ire of McCarthy was immediately labeled a Communist. In the 1017 documentary, everyone against the Arroyo government is a leftist-rightist extremist.

The video opens to martial music with the camera tilting from the sky to a long shot of Malacañang.  President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo then explains in the vernacular the rationale behind 1017.

Apparently, the director wan-ted to show that the President is a person of authority. Her words and demeanor give the impres-sion of a “strong president”.

The narrator then declares that the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the New People’s Army (NPA) ordered the groups fronting for them to launch massive protest rallies on Feb. 24, the 20th anniversary of EDSA 1. Images of ordinary Filipinos rallying at the EDSA Shrine were shown.

To support this assertion, Armed Forces of the Philippines chief Generoso Senga states that previous to that date, there were lightning rallies by supporters of former President Joseph Estrada and the late presidential candidate Fernando Poe Jr.

Strange bedfellows
The voice-over then states that Rep. Satur Ocampo of Bayan Muna declared a union of forces with Erap supporters, the Hyatt 10, and former President Cory Aquino.

Ocampo’s plan, according to the documentary, was to march with 20,000 people on Feb. 22 to convene at the People Power Monument on Feb. 23 and to march to Mendiola on the 24th.

Do the video-makers believe that the people would cower in fear because the leftist congressman had joined forces with supporters of former Presidents Aquino and Estrada and the so-called Hyatt 10? Are Aquino and Estrada rightists? If they are rightists, what does that make of the generals?

What about the Hyatt 10, a strange mix of government functionaries and politicians? Are they of the Left or of the Right?

Viewers would certainly be led to ask if it is against the law to march in the streets to celebrate the 20th anniversary of EDSA.

Marching in protest during the anniversary of EDSA 1 is well within the rights of citizens as enshrined in the Constitution. What then is so ominous about it?

The armed opposition
The video then segues to the armed opposition. The narrator explains that the NPA attacks against the military had inten-sified. Footage shows soldiers waging war against an unseen enemy.

The narrator then boasts that the NPA terrorists failed and that many of their members have in fact surrendered.

This micro segment begs the question, “So what’s the problem?” If the NPAs were defeated, then bravo for the AFP! So why is there need for 1017?

General Senga says that meanwhile, military components are moving against the govern-ment. Their alleged activities include recruitment of junior officers as well as spreading black propaganda to sow disunity in the AFP.

A newspaper headline announcing the escape of four Magdalo officers flashes on-screen. The narrator says that NPA spokesman Ka Roger Rosal has announced his offer to give sanctuary to the Magdalo officers.

Lt. Gen. Hermogenes Esperon then explains that there was a Memorandum of Agreement between the CPP and the Magdalo or the Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan.

As further proof of the supposed alliance between disgruntled military officers and the CPP, the narrator states that on Feb. 21, Lt. Lawrence San Juan, one of the escapees, was recaptured together with two NPA members. One of them was lawyer Cristopher Belmonte who, according to the video, had been arrested in 1997 together with the Alex Boncayao Brigade leader Nilo de la Cruz.

Raising a Hackle
Viewers are bound to ask: If Belmonte, a supposed top leader of the CPP-NPA, had already been arrested before, then why was he out of jail? Was he freed? Or did he escape? Or is the military simply doing what McCarthy used to do—labeling perceived enemies as “communist”?

The only item in the video that could lead viewers to suspect an alliance between disgruntled military officers and leftists is the presence of lawyers Argee Guevarra and JV Bautista, both of Sanlakas, a leftist group. Senga pointed out that both were constantly beside Col. Querubin during the Fort Bonifacio stand-off.

Of course, the two lawyers could just be offering their legal services or they simply wanted to be on TV.

The video then went on to say that a document among Lt. San Juan’s papers indicated a supposed attempt to overthrow the government through Oplan Hackle.

But the viewers never get to see that document.

Oplan Hackle is allegedly a complex plan to overthrow the government by attacking various government institutions and media facilities. It comes complete with sub-plans carrying cinematic titles like “The Main Event,” “Sister Act 1” and “Sister Act 2.”

According to the documentary, the NPAs have failed in their attacks against the military and many have surrendered. Why then would disgruntled military officers with top-notch skills and high-tech weapons forge ties with an emaciated group whose ideology opposes theirs? It just doesn’t make sense.

What a documentary is
Throughout its history, the term documentary has always referred to facts, clues, proofs, or giving evidence about something. It refers to reality or something that is real. The 1017 documentary is really more like a Power Point presentation than a film documentary. Yet with its varied and numerous assertions, not a single document—whether written or filmed—was shown.

For example, the ringleaders of the military would-be rebels were supposed to be Gen. Danilo Lim and Col. Querubin. According to the video documentary, Gen. Lim was the “over-all ground commander of the mili-tary component” of the alleged coup attempt and was arrested before the scheduled rallies.

Col. Querubin even had a very public tantrum when he protested the removal of his superior, Maj. Gen. Renato Miranda.  But the five-hour or so “stand-off” at Fort Bonifacio certainly did not give the impression that Querubin was a man under arrest.

According to the video, PP 1017 was issued to prevent a coup d’etat. Using PP 1017 as the “enabling law,” police dispersed rallies, arrested citizens, and threatened the media. Yet the alleged leading coup plotters Lim and Querubin were not arrested and formally charged imme-diately. Gen. Esperon recom-mended that Gen. Lim be brought before a court martial almost one month after the issuance of PP 1017.

Again, it doesn’t make sense.

Curiously, while PP 1017 states: “Whereas, the claims of these elements have been recklessly magnified by certain segments of the national media”, the 1017 documentary is quite silent on the role of the mass media in the alleged coup attempt.

Yet one of the first things that the government did after Proclamation 1017 was to harass the media and instruct them to follow government guidelines.

Kataksilan: Fact or fiction?

Stanford University’s Henry Breitrose, in his essay “There Is Nothing More Practical Than a Good Film Theory,” argues that “one of the functions of the documentary is to truthfully represent how things are in the world by ensuring that statements correspond to facts.” He further notes that “the normative assumption is that the film maker tells the truth, and bias or untruth is open to determination by colleagues and critics in the public forum.”

Critical thinking viewers can easily determine the bias and untruth of Malacañang’s video documentary. Murrow’s docu-mentary used McCarthy’s own words against the senator. The 1017 documentary might end up indicting the very people it is supposed to serve.

Datu Jamal Ashley Abbas is a Media and Film Studies scholar, a documentarian and author of an award-winning article for journalism.  He writes a monthly column, “Quantum Cinema,” for Mr. & Ms magazine.

PJRcover2

current events, Elections

Freaky Friday for Philippine Legal System

Yesterday, the Filipino people witnessed a freak show featuring the country’s legal / justice system with lead characters played by former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima (DOJ), Commission on Elections (COMELEC)  Chair Sixto Brillantes, and the Supreme Court justices.

ex-Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, former head of the "Strong Republic"

CHARGED FOR RIGGING 2007 ELECTIONS, NOT THE 2004 ELECTIONS

Ms. Arroyo is charged with electoral sabotage during the 2007 elections. But Arroyo was not even a candidate then. She was just rooting for her senatorial team. And so far, all the witnesses (Ampatuan aide Norie Unas and provincial election supervisor Lintang Bedol) who came out said that their boss (whoever they may be) told him/her to rig the votes because the boss was so instructed by the President. Isn’t that mere hearsay?

On the other hand, in the 2004 presidential elections, there was the “Hello, Garci” tapes. And really, nobody in his right mind could believe that  Arroyo, even at the height of her popularity, could ever win against THE Filipino movie idol, Fernando Poe, Jr., who was a bigger star than his best friend former President Joseph Estrada.

PLUNDER?

Ms. Arroyo, despite all the scandals and scams investigated by the Senate like the ZTE-NBN scandal and “Joc-Joc feritlizer scam”, was not indicted for plunder.

FLIGHT FROM (IN)JUSTICE

Why is the Aquino government so afraid that Ms. Arroyo and family would not return to the Philippines if they were allowed to leave? Ms. Aquino is a former president and sitting congresswoman. Wouldn’t she be so conspicuous abroad? Does the Aquino government think that Ms. Aquino would do a “Lacson”? Senator Lacson fled to Hong Kong and stayed there incognito for so long, until Ms. Aquino left office.

Sen. Gregorio Honasan also fled from (in)justice and hid from authorities for quite some time before he was finally captured. Afterward, he was given back his freedom, apparently after a quid pro quo deal with Ms. Aquino.

So what kind of justice system does this country have if sitting senators and congressmen and former presidents and presidential candidates would rather hide or flee instead of facing the law?

Below is my report for allvoices.com

ex-Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
arrested for electoral sabotage

It has been a very busy Friday for Philippine government officials. In the morning, while the Supreme Court en banc was deliberating the government’s motion for reconsideration (MR) regarding the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that the Supreme Court issued on Tuesday, November 15, the joint investigation panel of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) voted to file charges against former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo for electoral sabotage, a non-bailable offense.

In the afternoon, the Supreme Court dismissed the government’s motion and re-affirmed the TRO allowing the former President to leave the country for medical care. The Court also asked the Justice Secretary, lawyer Laila de Lima to explain why she should not be held in contempt of court for not heeding the TRO.

Last Tuesday, Ms. Arroyo attempted to leave the country on the strength of the TRO but the Justice Secretary, in an apparent defiance of the Supreme Court oder, refused to lift the watchlist order on the former president, which barred her from foreign travel.

After the Court’s decision, swarms of policemen arrived at the airport and the hospital where Ms. Arroyo is staying.

A few hours after, just before the end of office hours, the Regional Trial Court Branch 112 of Pasay City issued an arrest warrant for Ms. Arroyo and two co-accused, former Maguindanao provincial governor Andal Ampatuan, Sr and former Maguindanao provincial election supervisor Lintang Bedol. Ampatuan is under detention for the Ampatuan / Maguindanao massacre case. Bedol is also under government detention. He was being considered for the government’s Witness Protection Program so he could testify against Ms. Arroyo and allies.

By early evening, busloads of policemen came to reinforce police presence in the hospital. The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) served the arrest warrant on Ms. Arroyo.

The Arroyo camp questioned the arrest order saying that a regional trial court has no jurisdiction over the case since the crimes attributed to Ms. Arroyo happened when she was President. For high government officials, the proper venue would be theSandiganbayan, the court which has jurisdiction over graft and corruption cases of government officials.

The former President had undergone surgery on her cervical spine. She wants to seek better medical treatment abroad.

jamalashley is based in Manila, National Capital Region, Philippines, and is a Stringer for Allvoices.
current events

Does the rule of law still hold in the Philippines?

Yesterday, the SC granted a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that allowed the travel of former President Arroyo and her husband to other countries to seek better medical care. Earlier, the House of Representatives issued a resolution allowing Rep. Arroyo’s travel abroad. Yet the former President was not allowed by airport officials to board the airplane last night. President Aquino’s cabinet secretaries have issued strict orders not to allow the former President to leave the country.

Why is the Ms. Arroyo prevented from leaving the country? She has not even been charged in court, yet. She and her husband are simply under investigation. Does the Aquino government have the right to override the Supreme Court’s decision?

IMPORTED DOCTORS

Aquino announced that the government is not only willing to let foreign doctors come to Manila to treat Ms. Arroyo, the government is even prepared to shoulder all expenses. Obviously, PNoy simply wants to score propaganda points among the masses. In the first place, these foreign doctors would need Philippine licenses to practice here. In the second place, what about the equipment? Will they be also brought here? And in which hospital?

PNoy’s FATHER

President Aquino’s father, the late Senator Benigno ‘Ninoy’ Aquino, was under detention during the Marcos administration. But Mr. Marcos agreed to let Ninoy go to the US to seek medical care.

See my article:

Supreme Court says “Go!”, Pres. Aquino says “No!”